Repetitive solicitations by groups like “Ready for Hillary” are leading to problems for many of Hillary Clinton’s early organizers and fund raisers
Constant solicitations for cash for Hillary in the absence of an actual candidate or candidacy aren’t sitting well — And now, a prominent liberal critic takes a look at Hillary's Slime Machine.
Meanwhile, there are rumbles of a leftish "Draft Warren" effort in the early primary/caucus states
Hillary’s current problems do parallel similar stumbles in her failed 2008 effort for the presidency
Hillary Clinton has not yet announced whether she's running for president in 2016, but the “Ready for Hillary” super PAC is operating as if she had. As a result, some Democrats in early voting states already are being hectored by Hillary solicitations from that group's fund-raising emails ( See “Email Onslaught May Create 'Clinton Fatigue' Among Donors” by Todd Beamon, 2/14/15, Newsmax [http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/email-Clinton-Democrat-election/2015/02/14/id/624853/]).
SOME DEMOCRATS TAKING A TIME-OUT FROM HILLARY
Many Democrat activists are already walking away from the Hillary effort — at least for now.For example, according to a report in Politico, Democrat activist Mary Tetreau already had enough last November. With her party on the eve of an electoral walloping, the Londonderry, New Hampshire activist was sick of the constant emails begging for money for a candidate like Hillary, who isn’t even running for president yet. When another solicitation on behalf of Hillary Clinton landed in her inbox the day before the 2014 election, Ms. Tetreau opted out of Hillary’s pre-campaign ( See “Activists bristle at Hillary Clinton fundraising pleas” by Ben Schreckinger, 2/14/15, Politico [http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/activists-hillary-clinton-fundraising-pleas-115199.html#ixzz3RkmtCA00]). Politico reports that Tetreau, a three-decade veteran of New Hampshire primary politics, called the “Ready for Hillary” early-and-often email approach “annoying” —
“I’m not going to be ready for Hillary until she announces she’s running for president....”
In February, three months later, Hillary Clinton’s candidacy remains officially undeclared, but her campaign in-waiting’s emails continue to flood the in-boxes of Democratic activists and “supporters” in the early voting states.
According to Politico, the early heavy email strategy could create "Clinton fatigue" when Hillary actually does decide to seek the Democratic presidential nomination. Also, Politico reports, it spurs fears that Hillary is taking it all for granted.
ONE OF HILLARY’S BODY GUARD OF HITMEN ANNOUNCES A PROBLEM — PROMPTING LONG-TIME LIBERAL CLINTON CRITIC TO GET-IN SOME EARLY LICKS ON HILLARY AND HER SNAKELIKE OPERATIVES
Clinton is now expected to make an announcement as late as July, according to Politico. In the meantime, fund-raising issues became public this week when David Brock, a longtime Clinton supporter, quit the board of Priorities USA, which backs the former first lady. Brock’s snarky riposte that named names in the Hillary pre-campaign juggernaut raised lots of eyebrows.Politico observed that Brock accused leaders of the pro-Clinton group of planting a story in The New York Times about a fund-raising consultant that charges a commission, a practice that remains controversial. Brock called it ‘an orchestrated political hit job’ against two of HIS pro-Clinton groups, “American Bridge” and “Media Matters”; in addition, “Ready for Hillary,” has used Brock as a consultant. Politico also mentioned that “Priorities USA” has not met its recent fund raising goals for Hillary’s 2016 campaign.
Such shenanigans have led some of Hillary’s longtime liberal antagonists to come out with early critiques of both the pro-Hillary strategies and the not-yet-candidate herself, like the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd in today’s Sunday edition ( See “Call Off the Dogs” by Maureen Dowd, 2/14/15 [in 2/15/15, Sunday Edition], NY Times/ Sunday Review [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/opinion/sunday/maureen-dowd-call-off-the-dogs.html?_r=0]). In her Times column, Dowd doesn’t focus on Hillary’s early fund raising, though she does mention it – including some of Hillary’s >>> RIGHT WING SUPPORTERS <<<, but she takes aim at the Hillary Clinton “Slime Room” led by the likes of David Brock, >>>also a former RIGHT WINGER<<<, who Dowd describes as “fit[ting] into the Clinton tradition of opportunistic knife-fighters like Dick Morris and Mark Penn.....”
OTHER LIBERALS PUSHING WARREN TO RUN
If all of that wasn’t bad enough, also in the news this week were reports of a sort of “Draft Warren” effort.A timely Newsmax/Reuters article describes the following: “The scene in the New Hampshire office is one common to any nascent U.S. presidential campaign in the state that holds the country's first primary contest: Young staffers peck away at laptops and unpack boxes of signs with their candidate's name. *** But the Democrat they are working for, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, adamantly denies plans to seek the presidency....” (See ““Liberals Work to Lure Elizabeth Warren Into 2016 Race” by Reuters Staff, Amanda Becker & Frances Kerry, 2/14/15, Newsmax/ Reuters
[http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/warren-liberals-president-race/2015/02/14/id/624805/]).
That article goes on to say that “[p]ublicly, Democratic strategists in Washington back Clinton's White House bid and say it is unlikely another viable candidate will emerge unless she decides not to run. Privately, many of the same people say they would like to see a more progressive candidate enter the race, if only to push the conversation to the left during the primary contests....” And that article concludes with this “... a poll commissioned by Run Warren Run found that 98 percent of likely Democratic voters in New Hampshire and Iowa wanted a competitive race. Some 79 percent of 800 respondents polled Jan. 30 through Feb. 5 said they would like to see Warren run, though that did not mean they would vote for her.”
Clinton’s current strategy certainly does not want to see anything that urges something like — “RUN, WARREN, RUN” — “RUN, WARREN, RUN.” A chant like that could have many unintended consequences; such a chant might even cause Mayor Bill de Blasio to run for a higher office in 2016.
Hmmmm? “RUN, WARREN, RUN !” Sort of catchy, Bill.....
You are completely and entirely incorrect. Ready for Hillary is a grassroots group made up entirely of volunteers whose purpose is to ENCOURAGE Hillary to run for President. It started over a year ago and now has two million volunteers and has raised over four million dollars. 95% of that money has come from donations of seventy-five dollars or less. This is evidence of Hillary's overwhelming grassroots - average working American - support for her candidacy. Hillary herself has nothing to do with the group. It was as I said organized to encourage her to run in 2016. There is no Clinton fatigue. That exists only in the imaginations of FOX news talking heads - and some bloggers. And no, liberals are not looking to draft Warren. She is on board with Hillary and would most likely have a major role in her cabinet after Hillary is elected. Get your facts straight because the only slime around here is what is being spewed forth in your post. I am sure if Hillary were a man you Republicans would never be attacking her the way you so blithely and arrogantly do. Blatant sexism is what it is.
ReplyDeleteWe can all agree people were tired of Hillary in 2008.
ReplyDeleteEight years later what has changed?
No, you also are incorrect. America was not tired of Hillary in 2008. She only lost Iowa and then the nomination because she was challenged by a Black man. Historically, American white male society has always given rights to Black men before it would to women. Think the years 1870 and 1920. Black men were given the right to vote fifty years before white women. And still fifty years later women had to protest, sit-in, and get jailed to achieve the vote. The same was in 2008. White male America would more readily vote for a Black male President then they would a white woman. In every part of society Black men achieve "firsts" before women do. It is the continuing white male cultural view that women cannot or should not lead and therefore should not be president. This sexist view is particularly pervasive in the Republican Party. However, change is coming and we will have a female president in 2016.
ReplyDeleteComment above was same old stuff from 8 years ago.
ReplyDeleteThe White House is being turned over to GOP according to David Axelrod.
I completely agree with the nice lady from up above about black men and white women. Eldridge Cleaver called the big black dudes, "super-masculine menials," white men were the "white omnipotent administrators" and the white women were the "madonna-whore dolls."
ReplyDeleteHillary is a "Bride of Frankenstein" creature, who would probably be described by Cleaver as a "white omnipotent administrator madonna-whore doll."
She would have some appeal for some black men because of her big fat ass.
As for white men, I think most white guys would vote for O.J. Simpson for president ahead of Hillary Clinton; I'm sure I would.
Hillary is a woman?
ReplyDeleteIf I'd known that in 2008 i would have voted for her.
This blog is full of information
I think if you did any research on Eldridge Cleaver you would not be invoking his name here or anywhere. He was a despicable man who bragged about how many times he raped white women. He called it justification for what the white man did to him. He should have died in San Quentin. So who cares what he would have called Hillary. And besides there is nothing wrong with her posterior. Men are obviously obsessed with women's posteriors. What do you think men's obsession with 50 Shades is all about.
ReplyDeleteHmmm !!
ReplyDeleteTo whoever is doing all the pro-Clinton comments -
ReplyDeleteHow in the world could you like Hillary Clinton? Nobody I know likes her, and most of the people I know are members of the Democratic Party.
UPDATE: THE “ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE — GEE ! I WISH I SAID THAT” EDITION[S]
ReplyDeleteBREITBART COMES OUT WITH PIECE ABOUT MAUREEN DOWD’S TIMES SCREED AGAINST HILLARY’S MEDIA BODYGUARD AND SLIME MASTER DAVID BROCK — AND THE EARLY BACKFIRES IN THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN
DOWD’S TIMES COLUMN LEADS DRUDGE REPORT’S INDEX OF CURRENT HILLARY COVERAGE
You can’t make this up — first, I write it; and then it pops up hours later on one of the major conservative or GOP blogs. This time my post above went up in the wee hours of Sunday morning; and then this item appeared on Breitbart News at 11:12 AM PST ( See “Maureen Dowd Trashes David Brock, Hillary Campaign” by Dan Riehl, 2/15/15, Breitbart News/ Journalism [http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/02/15/maureen-dowd-trashes-david-brock-hillary-clinton-campaign/]). There is no magic here — and it isn’t rocket surgery — when the New York Times publishes something negative about Hillary Clinton and her attack dog David Brock; it will hit the right wing echo chamber like a Quasimodo big bell sonata, and that by itself is news that everybody in the right wing echo chamber and blogosphere will get to it eventually.
Dan Riehl’s article starts off like a real brick through the window of David Brock’s office in Hillary’s pre-campaign HQ: “If David Brock’s goal is to push back against negative coverage of Hillary Clinton, he has only increased it this week, fueling the media meme that Hillary Clinton is a divisive figure incapable of running a cohesive campaign....”
Then he moved on to a few things that I passed over in my post above: “Hillary hasn’t announced a 2016 campaign yet. She’s busy polling more than 200 policy experts on how to show that she really cares about the poor while courting the banks. Yet her shadow campaign is already in a déjà-vu-all-over-again shark fight over control of the candidate and her money. It’s the same old story: The killer organization that, even with all its ruthless hired guns, can’t quite shoot straight. *** Squabbling competing factions helped Hillary squander a quarter-of-a-billion dollars in 2008. *** As Nicholas Confessore and Amy Chozick chronicled, the nasty dispute spilled into public and Brock resigned last week from the board of a pro-Clinton ‘Super-PAC’ called Priorities USA Action — whose co-chairman is Jim Messina, Obama’s 2012 campaign manager — accusing the political action committee of ‘an orchestrated political hit job’ and ‘the kind of dirty trick I’ve witnessed in the right-wing and would not tolerate then.’...”
In closing, here’s a killer line that Riehl and Breitbart closed with; it’s something that I wish I could have come up with myself: “Perhaps John Podesta, as Dowd suggests, can step in and give Hillary the kind of campaign she didn’t have in 2008 – one that wins. But for now, the same old shenanigans too long associated with Clinton, Inc. are rearing their ugly heads. If she isn’t careful, that might make a potential non-candidate-in-waiting, Elizabeth Warren, look[ ] even more attractive to Democrats that she is already. Should Hillary stumble early, it might not take long for the party faithful to start calling for someone else to step up.”
The Drudge Report thought the Dowd column in the NY Times was important enough that it topped it’s index of Hillary Clinton stories, as follows: “...DOWD: Once Clintons had War Room. Now have Slime Room...”; “...Activists bristle at nonstop fundraising pleas...”; “...Obama bundlers slow to back...”; and “...Bill's libido threatens -- again...” ( See “Drudge Report ® 2015" [http://www.drudgereport.com/]).
Maureen Dowd has been on a mission to destroy Hillary for the last twenty years. I've been reading her since the early 90's and if Dowd isn't bashing the Catholic hierarchy (usually on point there) she is attacking Hillary. Dowd is off the charts crazy in her nonsense regarding Hillary. She has lost all credibility when it comes to her columns on Hillary. No one takes Dowd seriously. She is as bad as that other nut job Peggy Noonan. Both Dowd and Noonan are jealous of Hillary and her accomplishments. They act like little school girls. No one pays them any mind when it comes to Hillary.
ReplyDeleteReady for Hillary, Are you? PAC
RESPONSE: THE "I'M SO IMPRESSED THAT DAVID BROCK HAS PERSONALLY ADDRESSED MY BLOG" EDITION
ReplyDeleteIt's either DB or somebody channeling him...
As for Maureen Dowd, she did well for a cop's daughter. I doubt that she's jealous of Hillary the victim and enabler of Hound Dog Bill....
Wait until my post about another Maureen's article about Hil 'n' Bill --- Maureen Callaghan's Valentine's Day piece in the Post... "It's all-about Ssx..." do-dee-do-dee-do-dee-dum !
Blaming Hillary for the sexual promiscuity and improprieties of her husband will not work. It will back fire on the GOP as it has in the past and only make America love her more. So I will pre-empt you nonsensical post here. The NY Post piece was riddled with fabrications and nuanced lies. No one believes that stuff. Hillary would not stay with a man who dabbled with underage girls. Hillary and Bill actually have a very committed and beautiful marriage. She tweeted about it this weekend.
ReplyDeleteAlso, we will begin to see white working class men support her in droves in the coming months. A poll out of Philly is showing that. So there.
CORRECTION: THE "PLENTY OF TIME FOR THAT SOME OTHER TIME" EDITION
ReplyDeleteNO NEED TO MAKE INQUIRIES INTO BILL CLINTON'S CONNECTIONS TO PEDOPHILES, YET
WHAT IS >>> KNOWN <<< IS THAT THERE ARE CONNECTIONS — AND PLENTY OF OTHERS ARE MAKING FURTHER INQUIRIES — AS PREET BHARARA LIKES TO SAY SOME TIMES, "STAY TUNED"
My comment at 7:46 AM above was premature and ill advised. One of my followers, but not a contributor to the "...Fountainhead" blog, contacted me to be sure to do a post about Maureen Callahan's Valentines Day article, that appeared in the Sunday Post (See "Bill’s libido threatens to derail Hillary — again" by Maureen Callahan, 2/14/15, New York Post [http://nypost.com/2015/02/14/bill-clintons-libido-threatens-to-derail-hillary-again/]). Too quickly, I said that I would do it in a day or two. That thought was expressed in my earlier comment above.
Let me now say, "Probably Not... unless something big breaks very soon in that story line..."
Maureen Callaghan's article is a complete backgrounder on Bill Clinton's sexual transgressions, including his more recent associations with people allegedly involved in underage sex trafficking. Also, it's fair to say that the more recent stuff goes far beyond any of the earlier peccadillos attributed to Hillary Clinton's one and only husband, Bill.
The Post writer is completely justified in asking, "... Will Bill Clinton’s baggage derail Hillary Clinton’s presidential hopes ?"
Callaghan's lengthy and detailed article doesn't need any retelling by me — it speaks very well for itself. The underlying story does have legs and it will be covered here fully in due course. Here's a taste of what it's all about, according to Maureen Callahan: "Just a few weeks ago, reports broke that Bill Clinton had flown at least 11 times on “The Lolita Express” — a private plane owned by [a] mysterious financier and convicted pedophile .... According to [one of the girls allegedly involved], who claims to have been one of [the] many teenaged sex slaves, Clinton also visited [the mysterious financier and convicted pedophile's] private Caribbean retreat, known as “Orgy Island.”
One more thing: Just wait until the Democratic convention next summer in Philly when Bill Clinton nominates Hillary as the candidate. Who among us does not want to be a part of making history at such an historical moment? Even Republicans will be propelled to vote for Hillary and be a part of breaking the glass ceiling. It was Bill Clinton's speech in 2012 that Clinched the victory for Obama. So Bill might very well turn out to be one of Hillary's biggest assets. He started the Clinton Global Initiative which has done phenomenal work throughout the world. Wherever he goes he is a rock star to the public. Hillary will be our next president and will very likely be our Nation's greatest one.
ReplyDeleteThere is really something very wrong with the person who scrawled all the stuff at 1:24 PM.
ReplyDeleteObama fatigue plus Clinton fatigue equals any Republican winning in 2016.
UPDATE: THE “HILLARY’S FACE IS ‘MELTING ... MELTING ...’ ” EDITION
ReplyDeleteFOX NEWS’ CHRIS STIREWALT SAYS THAT MAUREEN DOWD MELTED HILLARY’S FACE WITH HER NY TIMES COLUMN — AND THAT COLUMN WAS INTENSELY FACT CHECKED BEFORE ITS PUBLICATION
HILLARY HEARD TO SAY ABOUT MAUREEN DOWD: “... WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT A GOOD LITTLE GIRL LIKE YOU COULD DESTROY MY BEAUTIFUL WICKEDNESS... ” *
Appearing on tonight’s Fox’s “Kelly File” program, Chris Stirewalt said that Maureen Dowd’s Sunday column melted Hillary Clinton’s face; and the show's host, Megyn Kelly, interrupted that it is continuing to do so....
Stirewalt strongly made the point that Dowd’s column was closely fact checked by the folks at the Times; and that Hillary’s own media watchdogs were probably all over it before it was even published in “The Old Grey Lady.”
_____________________________
* Movie Reference, IMBd quotes [Dorothy Gale watches the Wicked Witch melt in “The Wizard of Oz”]
“Wicked Witch of the West: You cursed brat! Look what you've done! I'm melting! melting! Oh, what a world! What a world! Who would have thought a good little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness? Oooooh, look out! I'm going! Oooooh! Ooooooh ! ”
AN EVEN BETTER UPDATE: THE “SEAN HANNITY, ROGER STONE AND REBECCA BERG TALKING ABOUT BILL CLINTON’S ASSOCIATIONS WITH JEFFREY EPSTEIN” EDITION
ReplyDeleteLAST NIGHT, ROGER STONE TALKED ABOUT EPSTEIN’S “NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENTS” AND MILD SENTENCING — STONE SUGGESTED THAT IT ALL MIGHT BE CONNECTED TO FAVORS OWED BY BILL CLINTON TO EPSTEIN AND OTHER ASPECTS OF THE EPSTEIN-CLINTON RELATIONSHIP
HANNITY CONNECTED HILLARY’S BEING IN HIDING TO BILL CLINTON’S LATEST SEX SCANDAL INVOLVING THE EPSTEIN TRIPS AND THE ENTIRE EPSTEIN RELATIONSHIP
Last night on his Fox News program, Sean Hannity talked about both Maureens’ columns (See my post and comments above), and how they discussed Hillary, Hillary and Bill, and the Hillary and Bill campaign to make Hillary President of the United States. Hannity also said that Hillary is in hiding to avoid questions about her husband’s most current sex scandal and his relationship with a convicted trafficker in under-aged girls.
On the same show, Roger Stone, a renown muck-raker, talked about the corruption of the judicial system in the handling of the serious crimes that should have been brought and prosecuted against Jeffrey Epstein — mentioning that Epstein's velvet glove treatment might have been due to what Epstein had said about Bill Clinton's owing him favors. Stone also mentioned that Epstein had also refused to testify about his relationship with Bill Clinton. Stone also brought up the documented multiple trips that Bill Clinton took on Epstein’s plane and to Epstein’s island.
Rebecca Berg of the Washington Examiner said that all of this was completely consistent with Bill Clinton’s long-time history of extra-marital liaisons with women of a wide variety backgrounds, preferences and abilities.
Hannity and Stone both promised to stay on the Bill Clinton-Jeffrey Epstein story until there is a proper accounting of Clinton's and Epstein's relationship and dealings.
Most Americans see Hillary more as "Glenda" the good wise witch ensuring that the "Dorothys" of the world are not hoodwinked by unscrupulous wizards.
ReplyDeleteDorothy GALE? Well doesn't the plot around HERE thicken as the pieces of the puzzle fall together.
Sean Hannity is was and always will be an idiot.
Bay Ridge Ready for Hillary Tea and Marmalade PAC
And another thing: John Podesta is getting ready to run and control Hillary's campaign for President. It is all over for the GOP.
ReplyDeleteUPDATE: THE “ AUTHENTIC VERSUS THE IN-AUTHENTIC ‘FEMINIST’ ” EDITION
ReplyDeleteA HIT AT THE IOWA FREEDOM SUMMIT, CARLY FIORINA IS THE GOP’S BEST UN-HILLARY-CLINTON — CARLY IS THE REAL DEAL — FIORINA’S “TOUGH CHOICES” IS MORE ON THE MARK THAN HILLARY’S “HARD CHOICES”
CARLY PREDICTS THAT HILLARY WILL TRY TO DUCK BENGHAZI AND “ PLAY THE ‘GENDER CARD’ OVER AND OVER AGAIN ”
According to the National Journal, “...[Carly] Fiorina offers no shortage of these generalities about her possible political career — until the conversation turns to Hillary Clinton. At that point, she becomes much more animated and detailed. ‘I think her clumsy attempt to channel Elizabeth Warren and say, “Don't let anyone tell you that businesses create jobs” was not just clumsy, it belies a lack of understanding about the way the economy works,’ she says. Fiorina also criticizes the former secretary of State's handling of the Benghazi attack and predicts that Clinton ‘will play the gender card over and over again, which is unfortunate but predictable.’ *** “For Fiorina — the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, whose only previous attempt at elected office was an unsuccessful 2010 bid to displace Sen. Barbara Boxer — going after Clinton has proved to be a fruitful tactic. Last month, she got high marks and substantial media attention for a speech she gave at the Iowa Freedom Summit. Speaking alongside other GOP hopefuls, she unleashed a zinger at Clinton that played well with the conservative crowd. ‘Like Hillary Clinton, I too have traveled hundreds of thousands of miles around the globe,’ she told the audience. ‘But unlike her, I have actually accomplished something. You see, Mrs. Clinton, flying is not an accomplishment; it is an activity.’..." (See “THE MARKETER – Carly Fiorina’s audacious sales pitch” by Nancy Cook, 2/14/15, The National Journal [http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-marketer-20150213]).
One current bit of conventional wisdom about [Carly Fiorina] holds that she will run for president simply to position herself as a potential vice-presidential nominee or Cabinet secretary. Absolutely not, she tells [the National Journal's Nancy Cook]. ‘Conventional wisdom is frequently wrong,’ she says. ‘If I do run and do this, I'm running to be president.’ ”
The terms Republican and feminist are mutually exclusive. You cannot claim to be a feminist and then be a member of the Republican party. It is like belonging to the KKK but claiming you are not a racist. Recent history has shown us that each female Republican who has claimed to be a feminist has turned out to be a fraud. Hillary is a true feminist from the 60's who actually has fought for women's equality throughout her entire career. Hillary walks the walk. So if we want to ensure that girls today have the same opportunities as their male counterparts in the future then the only candidate to lead our Nation is Hillary.
ReplyDeleteHillary did the one thing that a woman needs to do in life to really succeed, she found and hitched herself to the most-right guy for her, a roguish crafty thief and charlatan, Hound-dog Bill Clinton.
ReplyDeleteBut, is that enough to be President? I don't think so.
I've read some really idiotic comments at this blog but yours above is truly one of the most asinine. To think that Hillary's stature as a leader has anything to do with anything other than her own accomplishments and innate brilliance is absurd - and sexist. Bill was the one who married up - not Hillary.
ReplyDeleteGUEST COMMENT: THE “PAST HILLARY CLINTON CAMPAIGN FINANCING FRAUDS ” EDITION
ReplyDeleteFROM “OUR FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT ?” — BY ST. JOHN HUNT
“...Enter the potential candidacy of what may become our first woman President: Hillary Clinton. I would love nothing better than to become part of history by voting for our Nation's first woman President. Proof that feminism has finally evolved from bra burning in the '60's to equality in the workplace and the White House. A noble ideology whose time has come. To quote the Who; “we don't get fooled again.” In this next election I must look behind the gender. I must look behind the campaign slogans and I must look behind Hillary's speech rhetoric and promises. When we vote for a candidate based on something like gender or color, we [are] doing a disservice to our country. Rather than showing gender equality, it serves to show how ignorant and easily manipulated we can be. In searching for a more definitive identity for Hillary Clinton, I need only to observe some of her behavior while serving as Senator and First Lady....” (See “Our First Woman President?” by St. John Hunt, 2/4/15, The Stone Zone [http://stonezone.com/article.php?id=663][This is the first of a series of essay's in which St. John Hunt will present some rather dark but interesting facts with regard to Hillary Clinton for the StoneZONE]).
This essay talked about Hillary’s connections to Norman Hsu, Johnny Chung, and Charlie Tree, all three convicted of illegal campaign fund raising.... These fund raising illegalities were so extensive that according to U.S. News and World Report senior writer Michael Barone “120 people either fled the country in order to avoid being interrogated by investigators, plead the fifth amendment, or otherwise avoided questions.” — Eventually, “[f]ourteen guilty pleas came out of that.”
Another case discussed by St. John Hunt “...shows that Hillary Clinton was directly involved in what has been called the biggest campaign finance fraud in the history of the United States. Peter F Paul, a Miami lawyer ... moved to Hollywood to make a fresh start for himself as Hollywood producer and promoter. In February of 2000, Paul met with Hollywood charity fundraiser Arron Tonkin who happened to be one of the Clinton's top money contacts in Hollywood.... In meetings with Hillary Clinton, Tonkin offered a deal. In exchange for donations to Hillary's 2000 Senate campaign, Hillary would give Paul access to President Bill Clinton for business opportunities once Clinton left the White House. In taped telephone recordings at a Federal prison where Paul was serving out his sentence for fund raising scams he says this, “it was a growing relationship (Hillary's and his) I don't know where it ultimately would lead, but I suppose not to a good place because all the people that I met around them (the Clintons), that I dealt with in different events, have all gone to prison.” ... In June of 2000 Paul agreed to finance what would be the largest and most lavish political fundraiser ever staged in Hollywood. It was called The Hollywood Gala Salute to President William Jefferson Clinton. In tape recorded conversations between Hillary and Paul, they discuss the event, and is evidence of two criminal offenses committed by Hillary Clinton in which she clearly violates Federal election statutes. Although the event cost $1.1 million, her campaign entered that it cost $400,000. The $700.000 difference was used to secretly fund Hillary's Senate campaign. In the end Hillary was fined $35,000, and Paul was charged with Federal campaign donations fraud. Hillary paid the fine and continued to accept campaign donation money from Paul even though their crime had been exposed. Amazingly the media seemed to give her a pass. Paul has vowed to spend the rest of his life trying to expose what he characterizes as Hillary's chronic pattern of corruption.”
Nope, the earlier Anonymous feminazi harpy just don't have it together about Hillary or anything else, probably.
ReplyDeleteFrom her first big law job in Little Rock to this present "shoe-in" run for the Democrat nomination for president, if Hillary ain't got Bill, she got bupkis, shut-out, a love match, only lint in her pockets, moths in her purse, an empty tank, nothing-plus-nothing, zero, zilch, zip, nada, lights-out-and-nobody's home, closed-for-business-left-no-forwarding-address and on and on and on... Don't forget, with Bill and Hillary "It's two for the price of one..." and that one is definitely Bill.
To the Neanderthal misogynist above, your juvenile logic sounds like all you've got is "lights out nobody home zippo" when it comes to understanding the political world. Hillary does not need Bill professionally but chooses him personally. As a politician,she needs Bills as much as a fish needs a bicycle . . . btw, Hillary crushes Christie in NJ according to a poll released today. And she is already collaborating (female leaders do this) with Elizabeth Warren on the economy.
ReplyDeleteAs much as a fish needs a bicycle...
ReplyDeleteI don't think I ever heard that before. Especially when it comes to Billary.
And because Hillary just beat Christie in a poll in New Jersey, does that mean she gets sworn in as President or Governor of New Jersey or Mayor of Camden anytime soon?